User Reviews

I wasn’t sure what to expect here, and like those who loved it, it’s pretty good. It can’t be compared to others and needs to be addressed on it’s own qualities. Nice rich golden color with creamy head, aroma of wood and toffee, taste of caramel, peat, butter and wood. Smooth and oily texture, this is really different French beer.

Seems to be similar kind of thing to innis & gunn beers, heavy on the whisky flavorings with not much else.
Aroma is pretty much non existent, little malty bread and some vanilla maybe.
Taste pretty much the same but really far too sweet. Lots of overpowering vanilla and maybe some caramel.
A bit too one dimensional with basically no depth of taste or aroma, an alco-pop.

It’s been almost 8 years since I last tried this beer; this time round this is one of two cans of beers I brought back from a short business trip to Paris, purchased in a haste at a small shop near Gare Du Nord, Paris. Coming in a 500ml can, at 5.8%abv.; BB 10/2014, served lightly chilled in a straight imperial pint glass.

A: pours a bright reddish golden colour, coming with a nice foamy off-white head and rather restrained carbonation.
S: smells like a lager bier, with dusty and lemony notes upfront, on top of a rather sweet, burned-sugary and candy-ish malty body; given a good swirl, a mixed herbal and chemical-influenced note comes to the fore, suggesting random notes of high-pitched (I mean, light-bodied and “floating”) phenol, which I suppose comes from the “whisky malts”.
T: it tastes like corn-sugar soup with lots of vanilla-ish flavourings, sweet licorice, and a very mild touch of whatever maltiness following at the back. As the unpleasant sweetness and corns settle, the aftertaste gives away hints at the lightly bitter edge of hops and subtly phenolic edge of malts. Thin and slightly cloying in the end.
M&O: not too fizzy, but not smooth either, as the body comes way too thin for a 5.8%abv. beer and the flavour profile is hugely unbalanced. All in all, comparing this experience with my previous notes, this beer seems going downhill greatly.

* Bottle Version, 6.6%abv.; Tasting Date: 11/03/06
Tasted at the Quinn's, Camden Town, London. At 6.6%abv., the beer comes in a clear bottle, which I suppose is meant to show the nice colour from whisky malt~~ BB 04/07.
3.5 A: pours an amber hue, coming with a creamy, off-white foamy cap, on the top of a lightly-carbonated body.
3.5 S: sweet whisky aroma with a touch of vanilla, caramel, green apple, and Speyside Malt's fruity aroma, along with a lightly resinous hop coming through the foam. Overall the nose is pretty soft and smooth, without much influence from the peat-smoked malts as far as I'm concerned.
3 T: sweet vanilla accompanies the chest-nutty maltiness with a touch of white chocolates; a flow of oak-barrel like sweet vanilla flavour along with cinnamon stick slowly develops at the back; yet gradually giving way to a sweet and thin sugary aftertaste, like that of aspartame...
2.5 M&2.5 D: thin bodied though tasting smooth, the overall body is way too weak to be enjoyable, made worse by the ending sugary flavour. The palate falls short of the promise of the aroma. And if it's a smoked beer, it's a quite weak one as no substantial peatiness is present. I paid 3.2 quid for this bottle, as much as for a 3 Fonteinen Oud Geuze at the same pub! They could've saved the space in the fridge for a better beer, I think.

Smoked wood and light malted whiskey after this. There is still some lager like corn and grain but it is defiantly a step up from a cheap pale lager.

Sweet with lots of lager malts and hops along with a smoked wood and peat flavour to it. There is also some whiskey like malts as the writing on the same suggested and wicked alcohol kick to the beer with a sweet bitter finish.

Sweet with a smoked wood texture and a fair amount of alcohol for a drink coming in at under 6% abv. The beer is medium bodied and sticky with a spicy finish.

This one is a drinkable beer and enjoyable although you need to take your time with it and I don't think it is quite as good as I remember from a few weeks ago in Paris.

Had this one in Torino, Italy. A sweet aroma with hints of whiskey and vanilla like. Also the appearance is clear red with a nice tan head, which stayed for a while on the glass. This beer tastes sweet, sweet in a strange way and too much for a beer. I dont think this should be classed as a beer. The palate, taste and aftertaste are well just too sweet and "undrinkable". A horrible beer.

This brew pours a deep golden-yellow. The head is brief, standing around half a finger high. No lacing is left around the glass. It is white and composed of medium sized bubbles that dance around with the apparently active carbonation. There is no haze or sediment affecting the clarity, giving solid translucency. As promised by the label the aroma is predominated by malts and the smoky peat character of whisky. While these notes are fairly robust they fail to mask the adjuncts and sugary sweetness hiding beneath. As we sip, malts and a marshmallow sweetness crash up front. The smokiness lashes at the tip of the tongue, becoming fully apparent through the middle. The middle otherwise continues with white sugar. The finish is fully peat smoked malts, robustly combining with cloying sweetness, and little else. The aftertaste breathes a bit smoky, but is primarily an air of pale malts and continuing sweetness. The body is medium and the carbonation is medium. The feel to each sip is palpable with carbonation, contributing to the foaminess of the beer. There is little coating, and the drying smokiness leaves the mouth more similar to the astringent side of things, but not particularly dried. The beer is a bit watery, and the feel is otherwise standard. The abv is within range and the beer drinks more slowly due to the cloying sugariness.

Overall, what we enjoyed most about this brew was how the peat smoking grows by the end of the sip. While it is expected in the style, the flavor of robust smoke is always interesting when introduced to the palate within beer, and to this it did not disappoint. What was displeasing, however, was how overly sweet the beer was, and how any cutting bitterness that could have been was lost among it. To summate, this beer tasted like a toasted marshmallow that fell into the campfire. Edible but interesting.

Finally taste far from extraordinary, slightly watery with just a taste a little smoky, which is still a highlight for a Rauchbier. It also collects a small taste safety with the addition of sugar and dye immondemment and unnecessarily added. Peaty malt whiskey and smoked to excess is touted commercially then you do not feel almost. It's just if you feel the beer. Caramel color and nose in the same way except that it does not come from a caramel malt but more likely a dye or an addition. So certainly it is easy to drink but taste level is nothing.

A couple years ago two of my good friends went on a long vacation across Europe enjoying the culture, sites, culinary works, and beer. They came back and told me great stories of historic cities and amazing parties, but also fantastic beer - no surprise there. There was one beer which they kept raving on about, comparing it to the Innis & Gunn, which is one of our favorite beers. They both claimed that this beer called Adelscott was built in the same manner and the Innis, but even better! I do love the Innis, it is one of the beers that showed me the light - since this trip I have been aching to find this mysterious Adelscott.

And of course, as stories of this nature go, it is not available anywhere in North America. Adelscott is brewed by Fischer in France, and seems to not enjoy the sea voyage. I conceded temporary defeat until a friend of mine was heading to Europe this summer on a one month backpacking trip. I gave him a list of a few beers to look out for in every county he would visit, and I was sure to include Adelscott. The great man that he is brought me back this can, and helped me realize a beer dream now two years old.

Adelscott and the Innis & Gunn are similar, however quite different. The Innis is a rich Scottish pale ale aged in bourbon barrels, where the Adelscott is brewed with peat smoked barley, and is not aged in barrels at all. So Innis gets its whisky character from oak, Adelscott from barley - an interesting comparison nonetheless. The Adelscott I had was 5.8% abv, however I have seen bottles that list 6.4%.

I opened the Adelscott up cool around 8C (45F) and poured it into a stemmed beer glass. The pour was easy and smooth building a lush white foam in the beer instantly. I slowed the pour a bit and let the slightly creamy texture of the beer build on its own power. The final beer was glowing brilliantly bright gold with a backbone of yellow and sunny orange. It was really very beautiful, and was strikingly bright and crisp with an amber lining and sunshine rays all throughout. A dense and airy 2 inch pure white head was build with a creamy cap - it showed very strong retention, but did eventually dissipate completely. The overall picture here was very pretty. A great start.

The nose was pretty damn close to exactly what I wanted. Where the Innis bring to you the rich caramel and vanilla flavors of the oak, the Adelscott showed me sugary sweet pale malts, and the distinct clean flavor of peat smoked whisky. Thats what you get with this beer; the smooth and clasic flavor of peat smoke. It is gentle and balanced sweet by pale malts and lingers lightly on your nose. It was so obvious when I smelled it that I wanted more. The connection to a peaty smooth whisky is magical, my only complaint is that I would love an imperial version around 10%.

The first sip was a masterpiece for me. Ignoring the peat for a moment, the Adelscott opens with smoothly crisp and very distinct pale malt sweetness. Sugary malts and honey play over your palate and lightly candied fruits emerge as well. Sweet apples and pears melt into your cheeks, and a soft malty backbone coats your palate. But the game changer here is the smoothness of a old friend names Speyside. Elegantly clean peated malts show up on the front of your tongue and back of your throat.

This was the trick, the peat and whisky flavor is clean and delicate, but obvious and balanced. There is barely any hop aroma or flavor at all to add a bitter side to the beer - it is the peat and malt balance than makes this beer work. The finish is smooth and light with a slightly sweet, almost sugary malt end. The peaty whisky comes back, but its short and quenching. The mouthfeel was light and creamy, and fit this beer very well.

I loved the 5.8% version as a session beer, if it was availbale at the LCBO, I would always have a few in my fridge. I would love to see an imperial version for sipping somewhere in the 8 to 12% range. But for now, I'll have to keep searching for more of the Adelscott.

A: Pours a clear gold color with minimal head that left no lacing in the glass.

S: There's the faintest hint of smoke in an otherwise malty-smelling beer.

T: This strikes me as the bastard child of a Bamberg beer with an American Belgian style beer. There is just a bit of smoke in the flavor, but it is totally ruined by the cloying sweetness of the beer overall. I can detect virtually no hops to balance things out, and the label states that sugar is added.

M: The sugar gives it a fairly full body, and the carbonation is ample.

D: Unless you are already three or four sheets to the wind, this one is simply undrinkable.

Got this can shortly after I tried it again recently in a bottle. The can, of course, has no skunk from being light struck. However it poured with a soda pop tan head that very quickly went to zero. Color is very clear medium amber. Nose is lightly smokey and malty sweet. Flavor's the same. No depth. Smokey, malty sweet soda pop beer. Body's what you expect given the above. ditto finish. Don't want any more of this. Actually preferred the bottle with skunk to this.

A: The beer appeared a deep, clear golden color, kind of reminded me of the color of some scotch whisky, with a slightly off white head that was not well retained.

S: The aroma is sweet, caramel possibly, with some earthy overtones and a hint of alcohol. The aroma is of moderate strength.

T: Dominate caramel/sweet flavor to it, but also the peaty whisky astringent flavor is very noticeable. No hops to speak of. Not very well balanced, the sweetness really dominates and detracts greatly from the drinkability of the beer.

M/D: The beer had a medium body to it. It felt sticky, but was smooth and the carbonation was about right, maybe slightly too much. Again, the sweetness of the beer really detracted from the drinkability, it could really be more like an after dinner drink/beer, but there are better.

Pours clear amber with slightly off white rocky head that immediately dissipates, lots of visible carbonation, no lacing. Aroma is simple sweet malt, could not feel even a bit of smoke.

Taste is much better - sweetish and charred smokey malt, maybe a little too sweet, also hints of caramel. Smoke continues in the aftertaste as well. Mouthfeel is medium, carbonation average-high with some pleasant warming feel.

Appearance: Poured a clear whiskey amber (About 8-9 on the lovibond) brew with rocky two finger head which slowly fades into a moderate cap. Perceived effervescence is low. Lacing is almost non-existent leaving just one or two string-thin foam marks.

Smell: Nose is of Caramel and Peat smoked malt. The caramel dominates the smell. Can't pickup any hops. Nose is of medium strength.

Taste: Overwhelming caramel taste with Peat malt backbone and some cider like notes. Can't pick up any hops. The alcohol is noticeable and complemented with the overall sweetness of the beer gives out an almost medicinal like flavor. Slight Peat malt bitterness. Sweet aftertaste which lingers for awhile. Can't say it's well balanced, the caramel sweetness dominates the beer profile to the point where it becomes coying. Could use more peat-malt character and less caramel and maybe a more pronounced hop presence.

Mouthfeel: Medium body. Medium to High carbonation. Clean and smooth on the palate.

Drinkability: Not an easy beer to drink, the sweetness is almost overwhelming and the whiskey malt makes it even more of a difficult beer.

On a final note: I was expecting alot more peat malt character, and wasn't prepared for such a sweet brew. I was also a bit disappointed regarding the bitterness. It's an awkward beer, but i was expecting worse actually. Won't be having again.

A - Light blond, fluffy, soapy white head. Lots of visible carbonation, but little retention.
S - Mostly just boozy and quite sour, with an odd sort of sweetness.
T - Quite odd tasting, very sweet and nutty. Sort of like a watery, overcarbonated version of a mix between a cheap whiskey and a cheaper amaretto.
M - Quite thick and heavy bodied aided a little by the carbonation.
D - I could barely finish it.

Clear bottle, makes me angry. It always makes think that the brewer just doesn't care. Pours a bright golden color with reddish highlights complete with a large over carbonated bubbly head.

Smells skunky. Kind of a red wine nose with a lot of funk to it.

Taste is very different from the smell. There is no skunkish taste but a gigantic sweetness. It has a thin body and a very grape wine fruitiness that is saccharine sweet. A very processed sugary cider flavor. Nothing in this reminds me of anything like whiskey except an oak, earthy hint. There is no hop taste or bitterness.

A terrible smell but an interesting flavor. Not anything I would like to try again because its too sweet. I think a more pronounced oak smokiness and less sugary fruit flavor would make this one a decent drink. As it is now this one should be avoided.

This beverage (to not use beer in vain) poured with a nice copper colour. It was very clear and had a good appearance that successfully lured me. The head was white to off-white, moderately low, moussy, and presented good retention and reasonable lacing.
The nose was not unpleasant dominated by the sweet smoked malt aroma.
From now on the nightmare begun The taste was awful and terribly cloying. Besides the sickly sweet and peaty smoked presence I could not get anything else. It was completely unbalanced with no hops to compensate the oversweet sensation.
I almost threw the beer in the drain. Adelscott is one of the worst beers Ive ever tried and I hope I will forget its dreadful taste as soon as possible.

From a clear bottle that's labeled 'The Different Beer', this one pours a dull amber color with a modest but solid white head. The aroma is a little strange: There's a little charcoal (carbonized hickory?), some malt, and a bit of nearly burned sugar. A little faint, but an interesting and noteworthy smell. The taste is way too sweet. It's an artificial, very sugary sweetness that didn't do anything for me at all. It's like liquid candy. There's nothing to balance the sugar, and it was simply too much over the top. The body is actually a bit thin. It's an interesting brew, although not well put-together. It's worth a try, but it's not something that I'd ever grab again.

Sampled in Siena, Italy after the palio. Bottle. A very nice appearence with some shine. Transparent and ruby copper. No head. Aroma is soft and sticky. Whiskey comes through well in the bouquet. Whiskey adds a great deal of the flavour, but not great enough, very meek. Texture is nice too, coats the mouth. Could use more malt in the flavour, but generally is well, kinda, tasty! I didn't mind this one at all. It was unmistakingly macro-ish, but allbeit agreeable.